User talk:Sulfur/Archive2008
This user believes in keeping talk page conversations in one place. If you leave a comment here, expect a reply on this page. Blah! :For older discussions, see the 2006 archives or the 2007 archives. USS Antares image It's also up on Trekmovie.com, and I know we ARE using those images.Capt Christopher Donovan 09:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC) :It may be up on trekmovie.com, but if so, that means that either they have gotten written permission from startrek.com to use it, or that they're not following the rules either. :Anyhow, we've made it a past practice with these such images for the remastered episodes to not use them until the episode has aired, and until someone can actually get a proper screen capture. Legally speaking, it's just a bit safer for all involved really. -- Sulfur 11:59, 5 July 2007 (UTC) Fair enough. Perhaps you could clarify something for me though: can Startrek.com exempt itself from "fair use" simply by boilerplate denying ALL permission to reproduce? I thought that "fair use" was a universal rule that could not be overrriden.Capt Christopher Donovan 21:23, 5 July 2007 (UTC) ::Besides any possible legal issues or non-issues, there's also the simple fact that those images are not actual screenshots (which we prefer). -- Cid Highwind 21:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC) "Special" Single quotes? What do you mean? I must not put in any lines of dialogue?– Orr6000 18:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC) :No, I mean, simply, only use ' and ". Don't use the weird characters. -- Sulfur 18:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC) B-4 I noticed you re-edited a change I made to B-4. Here's my reasoning. Although B-4 showed up in a later movie, after Lore and Data of the tv series, he was actually thought to be an earlier, more primitive, prototype, lost and later rediscovered. If true, this would make Lore and Data both younger, not older, brothers. - unsigned by :Hrm... well, the changes that I reverted were to remove the name "Soong" from them, especially since none of Data, Lore, or B-4 were ever referred to with that last name. Indeed, Data's full name according to Starfleet is... "Data". -- Sulfur 13:37, 8 July 2007 (UTC) ::I think the anon got you confused for me, Sulfur. This user made this edit here, which I reverted since B-4 was created before both Data and Lore, regardless of when he was discovered. --From Andoria with Love 16:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC) get the pronunciation right In regards to your crack about getting the pronunciation right, I can only think of one thing to say in that regard and that is this. *raspberry* LOL :-) – leandar 14:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC) Your advice on images OK. I will make sure to add categories to images. Can you please provide me with a link to a list of categories, so I can make sure I apply all appropriate categories. I promise to be more careful in the future. -Nmajmani 13:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Nmajmani :Go visit Category:Memory Alpha images, and you'll see a long list of relevant categories at the top. If you can't find one of those to fit your upload into, default back to Category:Memory Alpha images. :) -- Sulfur 13:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC) ::OK Thanks. Image Tags? What's that about?– Orr6000 18:02, 13 July 2007 (UTC) :It's a new "useful" mediawiki extension. We're not making much use of it though, which isn't a bad thing. I'd just simply suggest ignoring them for the time being. -- Sulfur 18:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Not an edit war. The problem with Roxann Dawson's page is that a new user keeps replacing the current picture with others that do not have proper citations and thus may constitute possible copyright infringements. If there is one thing I have learned here is the importance of that, as you will recall.– Orr6000 19:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC) :Read what you wrote.. "keeps replacing the current picture with others". That constitutes an edit war. 'Nuff said. -- Sulfur 19:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Then leave the lock. – Orr6000 19:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC) You may also want to advise the contributor, User:TorresOmega593, on image policy...O Imperious One. :)– Orr6000 19:26, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Yugoslavia?? there was mason of Serbo-Croatians in episode Shuttlepod One, thus implying that Yugoslavia maybe exists in some form in this time can i make article about Serbia?? Help with mergin please, i can't make the template you told me to use for starting a mergin discussion work. can you please make it for me?--Örlogskapten 22:56, 15 July 2007 (UTC) :Simply add the template to the top of the page, such as , and then let things happen. It's best to read the documentation on templates when you can't figure out how to use them right off. -- Sulfur 23:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC) tnx--Örlogskapten 23:02, 15 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks Hey, thanks for reverting 's 'interesting' edits on one of my user pages. Picard(o) 09:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC) Re: Realworld stuff Can you make sure to throw the template on articles about novels and authors when you create 'em? Much appreciated. :) -- Sulfur 16:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC) :Will do. -- Michael Warren | ''Talk'' 16:17, 16 July 2007 (UTC) Image categorizing I see you had to go and categorize a bunch of images I uploaded today. It's been a while since I editted to MA, and so I didn't know that one has to categorize images these days ;-) I'll remember to do that whenever I upload new pics. I'm sorry I caused this inconvenience for you. Ottens 17:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC) Dark Frontier...OUCH!!! *laughs* You mean I spent two days doing all that work for nothing?! OUCH!!!! *Snickers and sighs heavily* Well... thanks for telling me. Feel free to revert the Dark Frontier article to what it was before. I do not think you will want to merge the two together...that would be way too long. OUCH! DAMMIT, MAN! *laughs*– Orr6000 21:08, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Maintenance Greetings, O Imperious One. :) If you look on the [[:Category:Memory Alpha images by episode (VOY: Night)|image page for the Voyager Episode Night]], you will see two images: Image:Controller Emck.jpg and Image:Emck.jpg. They are the same, except the second one is a close-up. Do what you think is appropriate.– Obsidian One 15:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC) :The place to bring them up is generally on the Images for Deletion page. Just as an aside. -- Sulfur 16:03, 29 July 2007 (UTC) Hope You Don't Mind... I got tired of the generic name orr6000 when everybody else here has such interesting names. So I created a new account under Obsidian One and have begun using that. I also chose the nickname The Head of The Obsidian Order. 'The Obsidian Order'... I just like the sound of it. :) And to prevent some schmuck from using The Head of The Obsidian Order as their login name, I created an account on it with my password. There is only one head...me! :)– The Head of the Obsidian Order 18:12, 29 July 2007 (UTC) Clarification I saw your comment about formatting episode titles but I would just like to know specifically what to do. I didn't understand what was different about the correct way and what I had done. Thanks 31dot 23:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC) :Episode titles get "" around them. In fact, the best way to refer to an episode is to use the episode link template, such as , which will produce . When referring to a series, put the series abbreviation at the start, such as , which gives . Fun, huh? -- Sulfur 00:49, 1 August 2007 (UTC) ::I think I get it now, thanks again 31dot 01:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC) Please weigh in. Could you please check out the image deletion page and weigh in on discussion number 8? I am really confused about the whole 'fair use' thing. The Cobra's assertion goes against what I understand the MA position on copyrighted material to be. – The Head of the Obsidian Order 02:17, 11 August 2007 (UTC) A Change of Heart I saw that the summary of Survival Instinct begins with a short precis, so I decided to add that in to other summaries. But, as with Nothing Human, I realized that there is no point to that for many episode summaries, as the little into on the top does that already. But you beat me to deleting if from Nothing Human...:)– The Head of the Obsidian Order 00:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Background infos Background infos come from the Italian Trek database HyperTrek (http://www.hypertrek.info) --Afullo 01:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC) :That's nice and all... but what's the source for the information there? -- Sulfur 01:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC) There is a staff mailing list, some dozens of people are registered in there and they (or better we :P) work together to improve the site. We add infos only based upon direct viewing of the episodes or canon sources, and anyway the last word about whether putting on a certain info or not is of the owner of the site. Mailing list home page if you want to know more: http://mail.hypertrek.info/mailman/listinfo/staff --Afullo 02:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC) :That's all good for first appearances of things, etc. However, that does not work for working titles of episodes, information from writers, etc. Those things need some sort of citation. A source. Another webpage doesn't do the trick, unless it is an interview transcription or something similar. HyperTrek isn't those. -- Sulfur 02:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC) Equinox I was going to incorporate the ID number into the article then remove the duplicated info. I was back in it when I realized that it had been reverted already. --StarFire209 13:51, 28 August 2007 (UTC) Boot me, please! I must still be logged into IRC on my computer at home. I need someone to boot me so I can log in again. Bah. -- Renegade54 15:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC) :done. -- Sulfur 15:52, 28 August 2007 (UTC) contributions I didn't come here to make work for you or get into edit wars or verbal fisticuffs though that's what it seems like in the 12 days since my first contribution. I have a different take on Trek than most. I never drank the Kool-Aid. I try to see Trek for what it is, not just what people want it to be. While I do like a good argument, I want it to be rational. I see a lot of unreasonable speculation and a lot of speculation passing for canon here and believe challenging those are valid exercises in MA. (I think the "AD" issue is an example of speculation passing as canon that deserves to be addressed but that's not even the issue anymore.) You reverted my changes almost before I finished them. (In the case of Equinox, it WAS before I finished.) If I didn't realize you were changing the centuries pages right behind me, I could have changed (and you reverted) a dozen more pages. You couldn't have waited a couple of days? or even a couple of hours? Perhaps with some discussion we could have reached a solution that wouldn't seem so unilateral or draconian. I would have undone or revised my contributions if necessary or perhaps you might see there's some validity to my changes. Maybe others could see the changes and have an opinion. This is supposed to be a collaborative effort. How can I contribute if you're going to decide beforehand what I'm allowed to do? Why should I contribute only to see my efforts unceremoniously discarded? It was fun when I started but it isn't right now. I think I have a lot to offer MA, but not if I have to wonder if everything I do is going to be undone. So please give me space. Let me contribute even if that means I make a mistake or tread on someone's toes. If I want to challenge what's accepted as "canon", let me make my arguments. Let other contributers have their say on what I write. Let me try to change your mind. Let others try to change mine. – StarFire209 19:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC) :Nobody even offered the Kool-Aid to me. :( -- Renegade54 21:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC) ::To address things in an utterly random order: ::In the case of finishing changes and reverting them, when an edit is saved, it is assumed that the editor is finished making changes to the page unless he or she has marked it with an tag (which should, of course, be removed when complete). There is a "show preview" button that should be used when working on an edit so that you don't have to edit and save the same page 10+ times (such as your recent endeavour, "Extinction"). In the case of the centuries and your additions and talk page comments, you need only add a talk page comment in one place. On the other talk pages, you can direct the conversation there, elsewise, the conversation begins to wander across a wide variety of talk pages and it eventually gets lost or misplaced, unless someone takes the time to amalgamate it all. Which is, unnecessary work. :::As I mention on my user page, there was a reason I saved in chunks. I didn't know about the tag. I see the point in making the same comment multiple times. Starfire ::Yes, there is a lot of speculation here. It's something that we're trying to cut down on, and it's something that there's always going to be a lot of, unfortunately. In terms of the AD/CE stuff, one of them was mentioned on-screen, which is what we go by. Nothing else was mentioned, and at one point, we actually had (for every date on those pages) both shown, until someone pointed out that the "AD" was actually mentioned, and "CE" never was. Yes, there were still some articles out there that used a mixed bag of the two, but that's mostly because they were missed in the initial cleanup a year (or so) ago. :::Was "AD" mentioned for every date? or only once? Did people actually say "17th century '''AD'" or "21st century AD"? In what context was the term "mentioned"? Was the only use of "AD" was inside a holonovel, where characters also mention "gats" and "shooters"? I didn't see any citations for the global use of "AD". If you really want to reduce speculation in MA, say ing "it was mentioned, now it's canon" doesn't really help. Starfire ::In terms of challenging canon, go right ahead. But take note as to what is considered canon, and come up with evidence to back up your challenges. Screen shots, quotes, and references are required to bring up a valid challenge. :::In the case of "AD", I'm not actually challenging canon. I'm challenging speculation masquerading as canon. Shouldn't the person making the assertion be required to back it up? ::Finally, you may (or may not) have come across the "strong suggestions" to avoid swearing on talk pages where possible. Your attempted workarounds with phrases like "Suppositional Highly Imaginative Theorization" just doesn't cut it. It's a pathetic attempt to avoid the way things work around here. Simply use other words that mean the same kind of thing. "Crap" is a good replacement. Not t'other way around. :::Normally, I have much better ways of expressing my incredulity or irritation. But the inanity of the situation got the better of me. (Those are my "I" words for today :} } I'm sorry you didn't appreciate the joke. I thought it was amusing, a take-off on the "special high intensity training" joke that's been around for decades. Starfire ::Have fun playing with the other kids in the sandbox. Remember that it's not all about you. There's a community here that's been around for a hell of a lot longer than you have been part of it. Be a part of it. Don't accuse (ie Cobra with the vandalism stuff), don't whine and complain (see the warning on every edit box "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here."), play nicely with the other contributors. Lots of other people have managed it. -- Sulfur 11:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC) :::I've already offered an apology to Cobra for impugning his honor. That warning may be valid, but that doesn't mean people '''shouldn't' offer explanations when they revert something. It may not always work but it's worth the effort. Failing to explain may lead to an edit war or hard feelings or discouragement. Newcomers shouldn't be made to feel like they're crashing a party for the "entrenched."'' – 17:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC) (Starfire209 - session timed out) ::::I just wanted to say I support that a comment should be added for EVERY revertion. not much has to be said. like vandalisation or something like that.-- Örlogskapten... My channel... 18:02, 30 August 2007 (UTC) Nightingale Sorry you had to step in there. I was actually planning to make the redirect a disambiguation myself, but since I thought it better to fix the links first, and that took some time, you beat me to it. Anyway thanks for the help, I saw you even beat me to fixing some links, you work way faster than I can :). greets, Capricorn 03:43, 2 September 2007 (UTC) :I'm just keen and geeky. :) As an aside, it's best to just point to that page as a disambig rather than listing all of the various pages on each of the pages. -- Sulfur 03:45, 2 September 2007 (UTC) ::I changed that, thanks for the hint. Capricorn 04:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC) Thanks for the tip! Hey, thanks for the picture formatting tip. I was somehow under the mistaken impression that, since we were entirely using non-free images, the whole of MA was de facto under a license that didn't need to be made explicit. And I would never have noticed the picture categories had you not mentioned them! I think I've corrected everything I've uploaded to this point. CzechOut ☎ | 03:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC) :Thanks for your continuing assistance. Please feel free to shoot me a line anytime you notice something I could be doing better. CzechOut ☎ | 03:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Pic of the day There really should be some sort of process by which an image is approved for a particular day. As it is now, any user can simply overwrite another user's choice for a particular day, instead of just picking a free day, of which many are available. This is, in my opinion, very ill-mannered, and can lead to silly edit wars. – [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 21:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC) Time Crime Why the revert? I have the comics in front of me, and my edits were the full titles, as they appeared on the title pages inside the books. -- Connor Cabal 01:49, 15 September 2007 (UTC) :Yah... the full revert was an accident actually. I meant to only do the True Crime ones, because it's best to make a "mini-series" article for them, and then just use the shorter title, since it's actually going to be easier to find and such not. That's been the practice on the rest of comics we've got out there. -- Sulfur 01:51, 15 September 2007 (UTC) I have raw cover scans (need edit/cropping) for a bunch of the missing DC v2 comics, but I'm hesitant to do much until there is a system in place. :'-( Just had to do a test because the cover of #54 is so cool. -- Connor Cabal 01:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC) :Yah, I have them all, set to the right size, just have to find the time to sit down and bash through them -- something that's been in short supply of late :( -- Sulfur 02:09, 15 September 2007 (UTC) Patrick Barnitt Thank you for deleting the redirect page. Do we also delete the redirect page Patrick Barritt ? I think a mention of his misspelled name on his page is o.k. and we don't need the redirect page. – Tom 22:08, 21 September 2007 (UTC) :Well, we had confusion over the name, so it seems reasonable to me to keep the redirect, just in case people and think that is how his name is spelled. Talk page redirects get deleted at every chance though. -- Sulfur 01:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia links Thanks for the heads up. I was just using previous articles as a template, so there are probably many pages that need to be updated as I just cut-and-pasted the link format from them. I also see occasional pages that use "wiki:" as an abbreviation. I take it the template you mention is new? 22:55, 22 September 2007 (UTC) :Yah. It's only about 6 months old. :) -- Sulfur 02:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC) Non-canon redirects I blame the monkeys eating my brain, and the fact that I am concentrating more on watching "The Journeyman" than on MA. --OuroborosCobra talk 02:30, 25 September 2007 (UTC) Article naming conventions Thanks for your tip about Kirk being different from James T. Kirk. I caught that slightly before your message came through, but not in time, alas, to avoid making more than a few mis-links. I have to wonder, though, about the whole paradigm for naming articles on MA. Wouldn't it make greater sense for the main characters who possess a certain surname to get precedence on having their article named with that surname? It would seem to me that, just to continue with Kirk for a moment, James T. Kirk would be — by a very wide margin — the most-frequently accessed person with that name, and that Kirk (surname) should thus be used for the disambig page. Judging by the number of times I've encountered a link to Kirk in text, it's a fairly common "mistake". This indicates to me that the naming convention itself is probably counter-intuitive. CzechOut ☎ | 02:39, 25 September 2007 (UTC) :The naming convention may be a bit counter-intuitive, but at the same time, your suggestion above is even more so... to my mind. Frankly, any time a link is to a single name like that, it smacks of laziness, and 90% of them come from anon contributors anyhow. But it may be something worth bringing up on the talk page for Kirk, just to see what other people think. -- Sulfur 09:36, 25 September 2007 (UTC) ::Hmmmm, I hadn't thought of it as laziness, but I suppose it could be, from a certain point of view. If you believe that surnames should always link to a disambig page, and then note that there are several key examples which don't, then I guess those bad examples are "lazy". But the way I look at it, we're only tending towards a side of the argument. :::Of the main cast that are primarily identified by a surname, as understood on Earth, these behave as you seem to be supporting. Namely, the surname acts as a disambig page for: Reed, Archer, Tucker, Kirk, McCoy, Scott, Sulu, Chekov, Rand, Janeway, Kim, Troi, Riker, Picard, LaForge, Crusher, Ro, Kira, Sisko, O'Brien :::It doesn't for: Sato, Mayweather, Paris, Chapel, Torres, Barclay, Kyle, and (for somewhat different reasons) Uhura :::The character of Dax is in her/his/its own category. Dax acts as a disambig page. Tigan acts as a disambig page. But the first names Jadzia and Ezri are redirected to Jadzia Dax and Ezri Dax. This would be all well and good, on the grounds that "Jadzia" and "Ezri" are unique identifiers, except that no Bajoran first names, which also tend to be unique, link to their articles. Moreover, some hosts of Dax are redirected from their first names, like Verad, but not others (Yedrin, Curzon) ::I still think the most logical course of action is to link the surname to the character most associated with the name, but if we're going for surnames-as-disambig, it should probably be uniform. at least amongst the recurring characters. CzechOut ☎ | 13:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Ch'Rega Hi, Sulfur. I saw your note about the "Klingon laddy" (as Kirkisajerk put it) and added information on her to Neelix's page. I think what I wrote is in English, as requested. :) Just wanted to let you know. - Bridge 03:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC) Image:Tessa Omond.jpg I tried to update the image with a clearer version. Look what happened. Bp tried as well. Same thing. What is wrong? – [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 11:52, 29 September 2007 (UTC) :Eyes Only, you need not leave this message on a bunch of different talk pages. Put it in one place. One. That would be the talk page for the image. That's it. One place. -- Sulfur 13:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC) Yuh still eh seein' de image. It still registerin' as 0x0 pixels. – [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 15:10, 29 September 2007 (UTC) :Yes. It's a Wikia-wide issue. Apparently they're looking into it. Have patience little grasshopper. -- Sulfur 15:10, 29 September 2007 (UTC) OK. Glad to see you can read Trinidadian dialect. :)– [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 15:17, 29 September 2007 (UTC) USS Chimera Thank you for the information. I also left a comment on a discussion thread regarding the canon policy. It might be something of interest to you regarding printed text as accepted by paramount. If I can find a cited quote from Paramount regarding this policy I will let you know, but perhaps someone else knows about it. :Saw it. Responded. Paramount has never placed anything into canon. They've merely licensed the material and "accepted" it. So, Memory Beta takes care of that stuff, MA/en takes care of on-screen material, and ST:EU takes care of the fan-fiction stuff. -- Sulfur 14:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC) blocking users hi, I saw the vandalism by JohhnyRebel and the other account. I also wanted to block them, but i didn't know how, so i started to revert their edits. can a normal user (that has logged in) block an other user, or is that Admin-only? and if a normal user can, how? :It's an admin function. :) -- Sulfur 18:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Blank Sorry, I hadn't realised I'd been logged out. I've PMd Shran, requesting deletion of my user/talk pages. I should remember to check if I'm logged in. Mafeu 23:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Basically it's due to harassment so I'm trying to remove my real name from circulation (search engines). I'd prefer not to go into detail if I don't need to as it's a complex matter. Mafeu 23:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Thank you. I've no intention of leaving MA, so I'll be returning under a new username eventually. I was a bit naive to have ever used my real name online :(. Mafeu 23:22, 30 September 2007 (UTC) :Both pages have been removed, but until the links to the user page are changed/whatever, the user page will have to exist so that it doesn't show up on the most wanted page. Which would be annoying as hell. :) -- Sulfur 23:23, 30 September 2007 (UTC) I can go through and edit all links from my present username (to my new one which I'm going to create soon). Although it would still be credited to this account, it would solve my issue and keep continuity of who actually added the message. There's less than fifty, so it'll only take five minutes for me to do. Mafeu 23:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Vulcans or Romulans? Perhaps you can helpe me. In are several delegates behind Sarek and Nanclus. Are these people Romulans or Vulcans? – Tom 23:28, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Fotonovel link on fan films page Hey, Sulfur. Just a heads up: I clicked on the New Voyages fotonovel link you put on the Fan films page and got the forum member login screen. Since I'm a member there, I logged in and tried again and got a thread of people complaining that the link to the fotonovel doesn't work. I checked the link and it says the fotonovel file has been deleted. I tried to see if it was posted some other place, but no such luck. I think maybe it's bit the dust. - Bridge 13:47, 4 October 2007 (UTC) :Feel free to remove it then. I was just moving it over from the Star Trek Fotonovels page where it was previously. Since it was fan fiction, it definitely didn't belong there, so... :) -- Sulfur 13:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Cleaning Up Thank you for following me and fixing up actor pages that I put images into, though I may not always agree with how you choose to fix them (Gwynyth Walsh, for instance). An image changes an entire page. I find it quite difficult to fix the page accordingly. – [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 23:31, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Editing advice Thanks for the tips. I'll keep them in mind when I'm contributing. Mistrx75 03:44, 6 October 2007 (UTC) Grammatical tense When writing about Starfleet protocol, what gramatical tense should we use? For example, do we say:- :The Prime Directive was the most important law in Starfleet. or :The Prime Directive is the most important law in Starfleet. If it is the latter of the two, do you think we should change the gramatical tense back to 'is' on the article - Class 5 humanoid -- 23:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC) :MA:POV. Past tense. It was. Not is. -- Sulfur "Crossdressing" redirection :Moved to Talk:Ferengi... Stop leaving before I say goodbye! And get better soon. NARF! --From Andoria with Love 04:39, 13 October 2007 (UTC) Copyright Thank you for formatting the copyrights of Susie Stillwells images. I've noticed and will do the same with future uploads. – Tom 20:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC) :Hey, no problem. It actually started by wanting to fix Bridge's delete notice, and I figured that I may as well may the copyrights look pretty at the same time :) -- Sulfur 20:58, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Thank you, again. What do you think about keeping these pictures here on MA? – Tom 21:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC) :I think that any time a performer uploads stuff, we should find a way to keep it. :) -- Sulfur 21:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Definitly my opinion. ;] – Tom 21:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Its so cute... "This should also stop the inane argument between OC and Hossrex too. I hope". Its so cute the way even the site administrators are unable to speak politely, and respectively. :) Oh well. If you don't think the wiki would be a better place without chasing people away... so be it.Hossrex 04:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC) :Oh come on. He was even handed and didn't take sides, went at both the new person and the experienced person evenly with his criticism. You have the article kept. Take your pound of flesh and move on. I wasn't even planning on talking about this again after Sulfur told us to quit it, and I suggest you don't bring it up again. --OuroborosCobra talk 05:55, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Format questions I have noted your, um, exasperation with me in history logs over several relatively minor issues of formatting. I apologize for the stress you have been caused by this, but I assure you it's not been in a deliberate effort to be contrary. I think I've just missed an FAQ somewhere that establishes these "same damned format as everywhere bloody else on the wiki". If you could point me in the direction of, well, directions, I'd be appreciative. I knew, in this case, that it wouldn't be appropriate to just link to 1967 because I assumed that would be pointing to a narrative year. I think I got the idea of 1967 from an existing usage, and it seemed reasonable. CzechOut ☎ | 23:10, 16 October 2007 (UTC) :Czech, sorry to jump in... but I will, anyway! :) For in-universe years, the 1967 is the way to go, and for production-related years, is the proper way (or or as appropriate). There's really no FAQ or guideline or policy on stuff like that; you basically just need to look at a bunch of existing articles sources and follow suit. The major stuff is on the help and policy pages, but documenting everything would end up a full-time job and produce too much documentation for anyone to reasonably follow. We already get criticized for having too many rules as it is. ;) -- Renegade54 01:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC) So when it is yyyy appropriate? I didn't come up with that syntax on my own, and it did seem appropriate, as I was discussing a year in the context of production years. Or have I copied a sort of "dubious" syntax that really should never be used? CzechOut ☎ | 09:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC) ::It shouldn't be used. If there's a date, link to the date's page. If you're talking about the production timeline specifically, go there. :) -- Sulfur 10:31, 17 October 2007 (UTC) ::As an aside, it's now (as best I can tell) never used in that context anymore. Cleanup is fun! -- Sulfur 11:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC) removing Tal Shiar from featured articles-article hi, i just wanted to say it was good that you undid the adding of the Tal Shiar to the article that displays featured articles. :-) I was unsure if the article was to be featured and that someone just had forgotten to add the (or what the template is named). I was looking for the article where the articles that was up for voting was posted, so could you tell me what that article is named? the search-tool for MA still is not so good at searching for articles that is not about something in the trek-verse. :-) take care,-- Örlogskapten. Qapl'a! 20:23, 17 October 2007 (UTC) :Start here: Category:Memory Alpha featured article candidates. -- Sulfur 20:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC) TNX!-- Örlogskapten. Qapl'a! 20:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC) Urban/Pine moves Hey, Sulfur. Just wanted to say thanks for handling the moves and editing for Urban and Pine's pages yesterday. Glad someone was on top of things. :) --From Andoria with Love 21:35, 18 October 2007 (UTC) :Well, it was obviously you weren't. ;) -- Sulfur 22:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC) Double links? Hey... Marc Okrand is listed in the cast section of Star Trek: Klingon. A double link? ;o) – Tom 16:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC) :Is he? heh. Well, I personally don't see an issue with listing someone in both bits of the credits. But maybe that's just me. There was still a typo :P -- Sulfur 16:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC) I know *lol*. cast and crew are two different sections...so two credits. – Tom 16:58, 19 October 2007 (UTC) aotw! could you please.. hi, could you please edit in the episodes The Changing Face of Evil and "What You Leave Behind'' as the source. they managed to not get included.-- Örlogskapten. Qapl'a! 20:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC) Re:Image Citations If you'd done your homework, you would have discovered that I'm extremely familiar with image markup so there was no need to try and lecture me about things I already know!! Although what you told me is indeed important, try and be a bit more patient with other users next time - a good indication is to wait until sufficient time has passed (maybe 30 minutes?) after an image has been uploaded to see whether the user has added an image description or not (in which case, remind them about it or add it yourself). Impatient actions, like the recent message you left me, might drive away new users who may be less confident and/or more unsure of MA. (By the way, sorry about accidentally having left this message on your main user page - I initially thought it was you user talk page I was writing on!) --Defiant 22:12, 22 October 2007 (UTC) :I've done my homework. No fear. It's more a case of, we've had such a spate of people just uploading images with no citations in the past. And anyhow, if you read the image upload page, it suggests simply adding them with the upload, in the descriptor field. That's what it's there for after all. :) -- Sulfur 22:25, 22 October 2007 (UTC) Consistency amongst group logos Hey :) I note your reversion back to the original, frameless form of the logo at Cardassian Union. I had changed it based upon the usage of logos at United Federation of Planets, thinking that to be the "standard" form. Your reversion made me curious about the general usage across various groups, and I note there's not really an established way of doing it. Some articles, like the UFP, Ferengi Alliance, Andorian Empire, Trill — not to mention smaller groups like Picard family, United Earth Space Probe Agency and V'Shar — have frames. Others (principally combatants in the Dominion War, like Starfleet, Dominion, Romulan Star Empire, Breen Confederacy, but also Tal Shiar MACO and Earth Starfleet) don't. Ya think there might be some utility to having it be all one way or the other? Or is it really just down to the fact that the frameless logos have transparent (or slate) backgrounds? Is there a desire to replace filmed instances of logos with user-designed logos? And, if so, are such homemade logos canonical? I'm not trying to detract from the work of the individuals who make these logos — they're fantastic and definitely spruce up an article — I'm just asking newbie questions. CzechOut ☎ | 03:56, 23 October 2007 (UTC) :It's down to the backgrounds mostly. If there's a nice transparent background, then it's best unframed. If not, it looks like crap unframed, ergo... thumb it. One of these days, everything'll be unframed, transparent, and look good. Until then... well, we putter along quietly. -- Sulfur 04:00, 23 October 2007 (UTC) Removing sig Thanks. I've been doing that a lot lately. Normally I catch it and remove it before I save, though. Didn't catch it this time, obviously. :( --From Andoria with Love 11:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC) :Np. -- Sulfur 11:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC) Are you my mummy? Regarding your edit summary on mummy: "expanding on refs for two of the apoc items... what's the other? don't just list 'em... expand on them". The first ref was for "Planet of the Dead". I have not finished writing the summary for that story yet. "The Mummies of Heitius VII" - haven't read it, but it's apparent there are mummies in it. "Time's Enemy" - the header at the top of the article says that they find "the crews' bodies mummified". Haven't read this either. Figured that I could note the refs and leave it to someone more knowledgeable to expand on 'em. Better to get the ball rolling and start the article than wait for the time (that may never come) when I can justify spending hours getting it perfect. Plus, I really needed some sleep. :P -- Connor Cabal 14:58, 14 November 2007 (UTC) :That's why I expanded on them, and commented out the other — It's still there, just "hidden" away. I was interrupted in the middle before I could get to the times enemy bit though to check that out. Generally, when I'm doing lists like that, I put them onto the talk page and throw a pna-incomplete on the article itself. That way someone can see it, expand on them, and fill out the references, likely even better than I managed to in the 2-3 minutes I had available there. :) -- Sulfur 15:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC) User:Offiantiant I do not know the correct forum to bring this up on, so I am asking you. This user seems to have some sort of ActiveX stream link on his page. Does MA allow this? I know that a personal page is just that: personal, but I also know there are rules as to what one can put on. Suppose this links to some kind of virus or spyware or other such thing? I have not followed it for fear of that. But if this is indeed the case, it would not be a good thing to have MA associated with that sort of thing at all. I do not know how you want to treat with this.– [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 19:13, 17 November 2007 (UTC) :Er... an active x stream? Where? I don't see one anywhere. -- Sulfur 19:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC) On the page next to the thumb of the strange-looking vehichle is a small white box that says 11 - 15 - 2007. Left click on it. If you are using Firefox you get a prompt saying "You have chosen to open of numbers which is a: application/octet stream. What should Firefox do with this file?" You get the option to open or save to disk. I do not know what Internet Explorer will do with it (probably just go ahead and open it, given its poor security). But what is it?– [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 19:25, 17 November 2007 (UTC) :That's the result of the mediawiki math module. It's an automagically generated file that's (if I'm not mistaken) actually a png file, but because it is named only a string of numbers by the software with no file extension, your web browser can't cope with it. -- Sulfur 19:36, 17 November 2007 (UTC) Oh. OK then. Good to know it is harmless. I take computer security very seriously and that thing had me very suspicious.– [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 19:41, 17 November 2007 (UTC) ::If you hover over the image, you can see the url of the link down below, something like http://images.wikia.com/wikitex/images/3/32/326/20380163333e21dabc5a61b8d7ef0. That's the path to the wiki to TeX conversion module that takes code within tags and converts it to a graphic (png). If you left click on the image, you'll get the box asking what to do with the file (like Sulfur said, there's no extension, so Firefox isn't sure how to treat it). Click on the Open with button, then OK (not the Browse... button), and another window will open with some selections offered. Choose Firefox from that window, and you'll see a listing of the code generated by the png module. -- Renegade54 21:07, 17 November 2007 (UTC) Sandbox and blocking I wanted to direct you to Memory Alpha talk:Sandbox# Contents (November 2007), as it somewhat pertains to you. --OuroborosCobra talk 16:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC) :Actually, his block did actually result from several vandalistic type edits, including a couple in the Forum talk: namespace. -- Sulfur 17:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC) RE: Talk:Charles Tucker III I don't know why insult and bad manners are necessary. Can you explain why they are? :Don't answer. Matter resolved with another user.– Leonard McCoy 12:05, 23 November 2007 (UTC) :I confirm that as anon user.– 81.172.48.167 12:05, 23 November 2007 (UTC) Policy pointer Re:Gorn, from Memory Alpha:Protection policy: The only cases in which an administrator may make changes to a temporarily-protected page are when he is adding a boilerplate message or other, similar notice. Thanks, Cid Highwind 14:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC) :Yah. I know. It did kill the argument though. :P -- Sulfur 15:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Please undelete Why did you delete that article? I was about to explain why I merged it, mainly the OK Corral article was just a few sentences and when it went to the Wikipedia link, it redirected to the gunfight article anyhow. As it took me a half hour to prepare and write the gunfight article, please dont just delete it. -FleetCaptain 23:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC) :When you "merged" the article, you threw away 3 years of history on the original article. If you're going to rename articles, it is always best to move them. It preserves the history. That's what I did. -- Sulfur 23:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC) As stated in my self revert, apologies as I saw you corrected that. You don't seem like the type that would unfairly delete an article which is why I came so qucikly here to discuss it. I also didnt know you could move article here. Neat. -FleetCaptain 23:43, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Apostrophe + "s" Thanks for keeping me on my toes while I learn the MA editing policies, Sulfur. You indicated that "words ending in "s" don't need " 's" to pluralize... only " ' "." I think you meant "show possession" instead of "pluralize." Anyway, is there a separate rule for proper names, because in this same section you did not edit "Tim Russ's directorial debut" while you did correct "species' history?" – MemoryOmega 18:47, 30 November 2007 (UTC) :I was trying to edit two pages in two places at once. That means that the note I left on WP was exactly what should've been here. Whoops. And I didn't do the Tim Russ one because... I didn't see it. :) -- Sulfur 23:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC) Thanks for already making the other correction. Now one more question on this subject: should the " 's" on an italicized word also be italicized itself? E.g., "the Enterprise's crew" versus "the Enterprise's crew." It seems strange to me that some might want to have just part of a word in italics. – MemoryOmega 08:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC) :Logically, it should, but it shouldn't be linked, so we took the tact to alter that rule of formatting, because otherwise, it gets very ugly with the linking and formatting. The choice was... simplicity over annoyance. :) -- Sulfur 14:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC) Thanks I appreciate the help getting acquainted with the policies, and it's been nice having a proofreader who works pro bono. --Icesyckel 20:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC) :As an aside, you should never link to disambiguation pages, except to indicate that it's a disambiguation page. :) -- Sulfur 20:34, 1 December 2007 (UTC)